TdF final stage

[Md]

The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay upright on the final stage
to win, as it was against "tradition" for the second place rider to try and win on the final
stage! Why?!

I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an ostensibly individual event, and
other unwritten rules that seem to determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't
think of any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until the end, so that makes
it sound like a fix to me.

What's that all about then?

--

Regards,

Mark Davies

[Philip Taylor -]

I don't think that tradition would have deterred Jan Ulrich from challenging Lance Armstrong in the
final stage, but tradition /would/ have deterred him from launching that challenge early (that is,
before the six laps of the Champs Elysee). I'm reasonably confident that if the second-placed rider
were within a few seconds of the yello-jersey holder, all hell would break loose during those final
six circuits, but Jan was just too far behind to make a challenge worthwhile.

** Phil.
--------
MD wrote:
>
> The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay upright on the final stage
> to win, as it was against "tradition" for the second place rider to try and win on the final
> stage! Why?!
>
> I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an ostensibly individual event, and
> other unwritten rules that seem to determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't
> think of any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until the end, so that
> makes it sound like a fix to me.
>
> What's that all about then?
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Mark Davies

[Steve McGinty]

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:07:38 +0100, "MD" <mailme@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay upright on the final stage
>to win, as it was against "tradition" for the second place rider to try and win on the final
>stage! Why?!
>
>I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an ostensibly individual event, and
>other unwritten rules that seem to determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't
>think of any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until the end, so that
>makes it sound like a fix to me.
>
>What's that all about then?

Whether or not it's against tradition it was no possible for Ullrich to pull back over a minute on
the final stage. He had said before the TT that if it was winnable he would attack on the last stage
and expect Armstrong to do the same. The TT result meant it was not winnable.

There's only ever been one non-TT final stage where the jersey has changed hands on the last day and
that was 50 years ago.

Regards! Stephen

[James Annan]

Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP] wrote:
> I don't think that tradition would have deterred Jan Ulrich from challenging Lance Armstrong in
> the final stage,
>

I suspect it's as much that the chance of anyone else winning is so remote that it is not considered
reasonable to ruin the leader's victory parade by trying to escape.

James

[Terry]

That could be because you don't understand the traditions of the race. There are traditions like no
attacking the yellow jersey if he needs to go to the loo on a stage. A perfect example of the
unwritten rules/traditions was when Lance fell (or technically (though he stated it was his fault
for being so close) when his handlebar was caught by a bag somebody in the crowd was holding) and
Ullrich waited for him to get back on. That's being gentlemanly and not taking what could be an
unfair advantage. Also when a rider dies, the peleton would ride as a procession in memory of the
rider, this too isn't a rule, and how would you feel if your TEAM (they do enter the Tour de France
as teams) lost a member tragically and then another cyclist sprinted off and won the stage. Riders
accept that the sport still (unlike many others) has it's own special and somewhat peculiar traits.
This is one of those sports where traditions are still alive, I for one hope it stays that way.

Finally as per Phil, Ullrich would have had a job on his hands making up time on this stage anyway.

"Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP]" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk> wrote in message
news:3F25066A.9DA7D8AA@Rhul.Ac.Uk...
> I don't think that tradition would have deterred Jan Ulrich from challenging Lance Armstrong in
> the final stage, but tradition /would/ have deterred him from launching that challenge early (that
> is, before the six laps of the Champs Elysee). I'm reasonably confident that if the second-placed
> rider were within a few seconds of the yello-jersey holder, all hell would break loose during
> those final six circuits, but Jan was just too far behind to make a challenge worthwhile.
>
> ** Phil.
> --------
> MD wrote:
> >
> > The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay upright on the final stage
> > to win, as it was against "tradition" for the second place rider to try and win on the final
> > stage! Why?!
> >
> > I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an ostensibly individual event,
> > and other unwritten rules that seem to determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I
> > can't think of any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until the end, so
> > that makes it sound like a fix to me.
> >
> > What's that all about then?
> >
> > --
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mark Davies

[Arthur Clune]

Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP] <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
: Champs Elysee). I'm reasonably confident that if the second-placed rider were within a few seconds
: of the yello-jersey holder, all hell would break loose during those final six circuits, but Jan
: was just too far behind to make a challenge worthwhile.

Jan said that were he only a few seconds behind on the final stage then it would be legigimate for
him to attack.

Mainly it's because there's no way for anyone to make up enough time on a flat stage to affect the
final result so everyone just has a celebration stage until they do a big crit for the last 60k.

Arthur

[Michael Macclan]

In message <bg33fd$bq3$1@sparta.btinternet.com>, Terry <kona@nowitsorange.net> writes
>That could be because you don't understand the traditions of the race. There are traditions like no
>attacking the yellow jersey if he needs to go to the loo on a stage. A perfect example of the
>unwritten rules/traditions was when Lance fell (or technically (though he stated it was his fault
>for being so close) when his handlebar was caught by a bag somebody in the crowd was holding) and
>Ullrich waited for him to get back on. That's being gentlemanly and not taking what could be an
>unfair advantage.

Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are referring to some form of
sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's
sportsmanship. Armstrong was at fault for his fall and deserved to suffer for his error. If Ullrich
had been ahead in the days when the riders didn't have radios he would have been well away so I
wonder how old these 'traditions' are.

It seems as if only the yellow jersey enjoys these privileges, anyway. I didn't see Armstrong stop
when Beloki fell and he didn't take a time out when Ullrich fell in the TT either.

If the organisers of the TdF want to further increase its appeal they're going to have to find ways
of increasing the excitement and allowing riders not to attack is not exciting.
--
Michael MacClancy

[Terry]

"Michael MacClancy" <news@macclancy.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Ggr6+CD$$oJ$EwvW@macclancy.demon.co.uk...
> In message <bg33fd$bq3$1@sparta.btinternet.com>, Terry <kona@nowitsorange.net> writes
> >That could be because you don't understand the traditions of the race.
There
> >are traditions like no attacking the yellow jersey if he needs to go to
the
> >loo on a stage. A perfect example of the unwritten rules/traditions was
when
> >Lance fell (or technically (though he stated it was his fault for being
so
> >close) when his handlebar was caught by a bag somebody in the crowd was holding) and Ullrich
> >waited for him to get back on. That's being
gentlemanly
> >and not taking what could be an unfair advantage.
>
> Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are referring to some form of
> sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's
> sportsmanship. Armstrong was at fault for his fall and deserved to suffer for his error. If
> Ullrich had been ahead in the days when the riders didn't have radios he would have been well away
> so I wonder how old these 'traditions' are.
>
> It seems as if only the yellow jersey enjoys these privileges, anyway. I didn't see Armstrong stop
> when Beloki fell and he didn't take a time out when Ullrich fell in the TT either.
>
> If the organisers of the TdF want to further increase its appeal they're going to have to find
> ways of increasing the excitement and allowing riders not to attack is not exciting.
> --
> Michael MacClancy

Hmm, increase it's appeal, well, now let's see. How many people have complained about what happened
compared to how many watched this great race?

Also, Beloki fell, LA had his handlebars caught by a bag, effectively he was tripped over, bit of a
difference there. Similarly with Ullrich, he lost control as a result of the wet, not because
somebody's bag caught his handlebars. What about when LA did the same for Ullrich a few years ago.

If you don't like watching the race because it doesn't appeal to your sense of sportsmanship, hit
the remote and turn over.

[Philip Taylor -]

Michael MacClancy wrote:

> Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are referring to some form of
> sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's
> sportsmanship.

It lost nothing for me, and gained a very great deal; demonstrations of sportsmanship such as that
displayed by Jan Ullrich can surely only /add/ to the appeal of the race, not detract from it.

Philip Taylor

[Tokyo-B]

Michael MacClancy <news@macclancy.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<Ggr6+CD$$oJ$EwvW@macclancy.demon.co.uk>...
> Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are referring to some form of
> sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's
> sportsmanship. Armstrong was at fault for his fall and deserved to suffer for his error. If
> Ullrich had been ahead in the days when the riders didn't have radios he would have been well away
> so I wonder how old these 'traditions' are.

FWIW, race radios had nothing to so with it: Tyler Hamilton rode up and told the others to wait
for Lance....

Cheers, Brendan

[Andrew B]

It has been common practise to show good sportsmanship for a number of years in cycling. When Jan
left the road a few years ago LA waited for him. There are numerous examples of people waiting and /
or not attacking when a problem arises.

I personally find it quite refreshing !

Regards,

Andrew B

"Tokyo-B" <b@zip.com.au> wrote in message news:95ff1cc.0308041913.5f9b2ef9@posting.google.com...
> Michael MacClancy <news@macclancy.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<Ggr6+CD$$oJ$EwvW@macclancy.demon.co.uk>...
> > Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are referring to some form of
> > sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's
> > sportsmanship. Armstrong was at fault for his fall and deserved to suffer for his error. If
> > Ullrich had been ahead in the days when the riders didn't have radios he would have been well
> > away so I wonder how old these 'traditions' are.
>
> FWIW, race radios had nothing to so with it: Tyler Hamilton rode up and told the others to wait
> for Lance....
>
> Cheers, Brendan

[Dan Gregory]

"Tokyo-B" <b@zip.com.au> wrote in message
> FWIW, race radios had nothing to so with it: Tyler Hamilton rode up and told the others to wait
> for Lance....
If Jan hadn't been waiting already Hamilton would not have caught him! All the best Dan Gregory